On 20-05-2022 12:21, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 18/05/2022 19:36, Sameer Pujar wrote:
+description: |
+ The Multi Band Dynamic Range Compressor (MBDRC) is part of Output
+ Processing Engine (OPE) which interfaces with Audio Hub (AHUB) via
+ Audio Client Interface (ACIF). MBDRC can be used as a traditional
+ single full band or a dual band or a multi band dynamic processor.
+
+maintainers:
+ - Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx>
+ - Mohan Kumar <mkumard@xxxxxxxxxx>
+ - Sameer Pujar <spujar@xxxxxxxxxx>
+
+properties:
+ $nodename:
+ pattern: "^mbdrc@[0-9a-f]*$"
Why? We enforce only generic names in shared schemas and this is neither
shared schema nor is it generic name.
Idea was to keep these node names consistent across DT files and parent
node can allow a given list of child nodes with strict checks. Does name
like "dynamic-range-compressor@xxx"
The checks are not coming from device node name, but from matching
schema to compatible. Why do you need consistent names across DTS files?
They should be anyway generic but what happens if they differ?
The IP is re-used in many Tegra SoC generations and thus it is nice to
use the same name. But,
Additionally, the parent schema enforces nodes of children, so if this
is included in other schema, then the change is pointless.
I see your point. Since parent schema already enforces the child node
names, another place from child schema to enforce similar rule is not
really necessary for now. I will drop this. Thanks.
